Re: [PATCH 0/1] Embedded Maintainer(s), linux-embedded@vger list

From: Adrian Bunk
Date: Wed Jun 25 2008 - 11:43:54 EST


On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 10:50:43AM +0100, James Chapman wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 07:28:09PM +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>>> On Thursday 01 May 2008 12:41, Andi Kleen wrote:
>>>>> To a large extent, I agree. I certainly don't want to focus solely on
>>>>> code size; there's a lot more to embedded Linux than that. But it _is_
>>>> Not only code size, far more important is dynamic memory consumption.
>>>> [admittedly we right now lack a good instrumentation framework for this]
>>>>
>>>>> There are some cases where we really _do_ want to have CONFIG options,
>>>>> but I agree that we should keep them to a minimum. And when we _do_ have
>>>>> CONFIG options, they don't have to litter the actual code with ifdefs.
>>>> The problem I see is more that really nobody can even compile not
>>>> alone test all these combinations anymore. Hidding the problem in
>>>> inlines
>>>> does not solve that. And no randconfig is not the solution either.
>>> Because we allowed kernel to be developed without the requirement that
>>> random config should be buildable for release kernels.
>>>
>>> Had it been a requirement, keeping it in shape wouldn't be
>>> too difficult.
>>>
>>> Sure enough, _now_ fixing kernel to pass such a test on i386
>>> would take several weeks of work at least. But it is doable.
>>> ...
>>
>> On i386 it might even already work today.
>>
>> But guess how much time it costs to get at least all defconfigs
>> compiling on the other 22 architectures.
>>
>> Even getting allmodconfig/allyesconfig compiling isn't trivial for all
>> architectures, and random configurations are _far_ from compiling.
> >
> > And we are not talking about something to be done once, as soon as you
> > leave x86 there are tons of regular breakages.
>
> Could automated builds and build error reporting be used to help resolve
> these problems?
>
> The good people at Simtec have an automated build report available as an
> e-mail digest. I use it to watch for architecture build breakages in
> subsystems or drivers that I use or touch. It covers defconfigs of ARM
> and MIPS architectures and reports compile errors/warnings, module size,
> kernel size etc. If this approach were extended/distributed to cover
> more architectures

Jan Dittmer has a great page showing the build status and kernel size of
the defconfigs of all architectures that is running since 2004 or 2005:
http://l4x.org/k/

> and random config builds, developers could with
> little effort spot problems and fix them. Hell, it might also encourage
> new developers to get involved and contribute.

Perhaps in an ideal world...

In reality, I'd claim I'm one out of only two people who regularly fix
architecture-specific build problems for all architectures.

> James Chapman

cu
Adrian

--

"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/